Jim Clausen was "shocked" when the manager of the Oaks Apartments in Albany told him he could face eviction if he did not remove the American flags that fly from his Jeep and motorcycle when they are parked at the complex.

Barb Holcomb, who manages the Oaks Apartments at 1440 Geary Circle S.E. for owner Stan Keller, said Clausen is correct.

She is requiring that tenants take off any flag that flies from their vehicles, and that includes the Mexican flag and college team flags.

Political and religous signs at a tenant's unit also are not permitted.

"I'm trying to avoid any conflict," Holcomb said. "I have a problem when tenants' rights to free speech come into contact with other tenants' rights of peaceful enjoyment. This policy is not a violation of anyone's civil rights.

"We're a diverse community here, and we've had previous problems with this sort of thing," she said.

Jann Carson, the associate director of the ACLU of Oregon, agreed that Clausen and other tenants' civil rights are not being violated under the new policy

SNIP

Holcomb said she wanted to implement the flag policy earlier but the previous manager would not say anything to the tenants.

"We have a new manager who is taking care of this," she said. "It's a small housekeeping problem we want to take care of."

So...if these liberal, namby-pamby nitwits around the country who are banning the use of American flags ON OUR OWN PROPERTY (CARS BELONG TO THE PEOPLE WHO BUY THEM) can determine where we can place our flags...Then eventually we will only be able to put them up in our own bedrooms. We cannot let these people rule us.

This is America. We have the right to put our AMERICAN flag on our own property. The country is certainly going mad allowing a few tell us not to fly our own country's flag. I am so angry I am seeing STARS AND STRIPES!

"I'm trying to avoid any conflict," Holcomb said. "I have a problem when tenants' rights to free speech come into contact with other tenants' rights of peaceful enjoyment. This policy is not a violation of anyone's civil rights.

Well isn't she just plain vanilla. Never mind the whole free speech thingy in the constitution.

"I'm trying to avoid any conflict," Holcomb said. "I have a problem when tenants' rights to free speech come into contact with other tenants' rights of peaceful enjoyment. This policy is not a violation of anyone's civil rights...Hmmm - when people see something on TV which offends them, they're told to change the channel - here's an idea for those whose "peaceful enjoyment" might be upset by seeing a flag they don't like (what a bizarre notion) - look the other way.......

I work in the industry, and though state laws vary, I seriously doubt he could be evicted for breaching this rule if it wasn’t specified in his lease. They can choose not to renew his lease, or make him sign on to the new rule at renewal time, and evict him then, but I can’t imagine any judge would side with the landlord in this case, even in the most pro-landlord jurisdictions in the country.

Yes, that is true. However, if the owner has entered into a signed lease agreement with the tenant, then the owner can’t simply evict a tenant for breaching some new rule they just made up. If the rules weren’t part of the signed lease, then the owner won’t be able to use the courts to enforce them on that particular tenant.

Then I'd start inundating them with complaints about other people's promoting foreign, un-American cars. Every Honda, Toyoda, BMW, etc. that had a visible company logo... I'd write/email a complaint. If they can't see my flag, I don't want to see their foreign support.

She'll quickly see that what she is trying to do is pointless and doomed to failure.

Your view is also a bit inaccurate. Just because you own something that others rent, does not give you the ability to enact tenant rules that violate state and federal laws, much their the state and federal constitutions. They aren’t lords and their properties aren’t fiefdoms. They can make up regulations in contracts but they can’t make up anything they want and take away people’s rights and liberties that are protected. The flag is a political symbol and is an expression of protected speech.

She will be sued for this and she will lose big time.

40
posted on 10/13/2009 8:48:11 PM PDT
by Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)

What? Where's the "right of peaceful enjoyment"? If it exists, the Obozo is violating mine by destroying the country which I peacefully enjoy.

My thoughts exactly. What happens if someone is offended?What are they afraid will happen? I would love to see how they detail the 'legal grounds' for the "right" of peaceful enjoyment. Also, how would an apartment lease cover items (flags, stickers) that are on your vehicle? (Your car cannot be red, white or blue in color, and meet the owner's non-offensive model standard....? Huh?)

Your view is also a bit inaccurate. Just because you own something that others rent, does not give you the ability to enact tenant rules that violate state and federal laws, much their the state and federal constitutions. They arent lords and their properties arent fiefdoms. They can make up regulations in contracts but they cant make up anything they want and take away peoples rights and liberties that are protected. The flag is a political symbol and is an expression of protected speech.

Hardly. My view is based on freedom and property rights. Your view is that of a typical statist who can regulate and legislate my private property rights out of existence.

And people wonder why the Obamas of the world keep gaining traction? The answer is right here on this thread.

46
posted on 10/14/2009 8:42:39 AM PDT
by jwalsh07
(Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what you can do for Obama.)

And I want to emphasize that I am all for landlords being able to be in control of their properties. When you have other people involved, they have constitutionally protected rights at the federal and state levels, and even though you own a building doesn’t give them the magical power to deny/violate those other peoples’ rights.

Restricting political speech ain’t a power a landlord has. Noise problems, yes. Garbage on the lawn? Yes. Ability to have pets? Yes. Having people staying there not on the lease? Yes.

The problem here is that it’s easy to deal with things when you own the property and you’re the only one on it. It’s another thing when other people are in what you own. You are bound by law to deal with people a certain way and it prevents you from doing things you’d like to do because it’s YOUR property. It’s why I am NOT a landlord.

But for example, you can’t legally not rent to people because you don’t like their skin color. Or their sexual orientation, if you are made aware of it. Or their religion. You could not refuse to rent to them if their politics were different than yours. You may not be able to rent to them based on their criminal history.

Conversely you can decide to not rent to them if their credit rating has problems, they don’t have a job (no income to pay rent), they have pets and you don’t allow pets in your building, etc.

Landlords don’t have omnipotent powers and I know this as I have extremely close friends who own properties and rent to others. I am amazed at what they have to deal with. They know the law and write up very favorable contracts for themselves and they are also legal (they know the laws and what they can and cannot put in a contract) and not allowing people to fly the American flag on their car isn’t something they can tell them NOT to do because they are renters.

Now in this particular story and situation, something else might be going on in the complex, such as mexican and american groups of renters getting charged up over amnesty/immigration or something but if that is the case, they still don’t have the right to force people to take those flags off their vehicles, and if they think that one little thing is going to fix or stabilize what’s going on with those people they are nuts.

48
posted on 10/14/2009 9:35:27 AM PDT
by Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.